500115 Afran
Mohammad Khazaee, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations made the remarks before the United Nations Security Council on June 9, 2010.
He added that the Islamic Republic of Iran as one of the most powerful and stable countries in the region has never bowed and will never bow to the hostile actions and pressures by these few powers and will continue to defend its rights."
The full text of his speech is as follows:
"In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
"Mr. President,
"Before entering into this Chamber, I was refreshing my memories about history. History is indeed a wonderful instructor especially when it follows us to this very moment. A Wiseman used to say “It is not the history that repeats itself; it is us that repeat the same mistakes”. Reviewing our bitter past memories together with a close look at how this Council still acts today proves that we are still dealing with a biased and unjust international system that is based on hegemony of the most powerful.
"In order to place on record for the conscience of all peace loving people around the world, I would like to say a few words about the unfair pressures that our nation has endured due to the aggression and intervention of some of the same countries whose representatives are sitting around this table today and pushing for the imposition of more pressures against the Iranian Nation. Let me talk about our own historical experiences. It is not, of course, accidental or spontaneous. Comparison in this case is amazingly instructive. The case that you as members of the Security Council have considered today has quite identical characteristics with the case against my country in 1951. The key words are quite similar: energy, independence and big powers intervention.
"UK in early 50s was arguing exactly the same as today: nationalization of Iran’s oil is putting in danger peace and security of the region and the world. Just replace the phrase “oil nationalization” from accusations against Iran at that time, with “nuclear activities” of today and you will have quite working statements for diplomats who are repeating the history. It is, however, worth remembering that when Iran won the case regarding its oil nationalization in Hague, UK sold a trumped anti-communist story to Eisenhower and a US led coup reinstated Shah's dictatorship. Needless to say, this coup d'état was organized and implemented under the pretext of maintenance of international peace and security, and respect for democracy and freedom, a qualification which, afterwards, was frequently used to justify many other similar subversive actions against other developing nations in order to preserve or expand the interests of international cartels and consortiums. The message was clear: no one should be allowed to endanger the vital interests of the capitalist world.
"Yet again history will not forget about the stark similarity and sharp contrast which exists between the efforts to impose anti-Iranian sanctions at this time and that of the 1950’s against the nationalization of Iranian oil industry. The stark similarity is that the UK-US axis at both times has been at work to deprive Iranian Nation of its absolute right to achieve self-sufficiency in energy production whether it be hydrocarbons or peaceful nuclear energy. The difference, however, is that the Islamic Republic of Iran today is more than ever powerful and supported by its people which enjoys three decades of political experience, a scientific and industrial renaissance and rich cultural heritage and enjoys the support of the overwhelming majority of the nations.
"Mr. President,
"The hostile actions of these few powers against our nation are not new. The US and its allies even intervened on behalf of Saddam in his aggression against Iran, providing him with chemical weapons and other military support. This deadly support included increasing supplies of chemical and biological agents even after the first UN report on the use of these lethal weapons by Saddam against civilian Kurds in northern Iraq and against Iranian troops. The first reaction by these powers was to deny the accounts. The second reaction was to declare any response to the attacks as "premature". The third response was to sharply escalate the delivery of arms and chemical and biological agents. Again no action was taken by the Security Council against this brutal use of chemical weapons because of the veto threats by the same providers of these inhumane weapons. They were the same powers who have imposed this resolution on the Security Council today.
"As soon as the US saw the victory of Iran in the war imminent, it directly entered into confrontation with Iran by among other things, shutting down an Iranian passenger airplane. The inaction by the Security Council was again outrageous.
"I will not dwell on the abuse of this body and the biggest lies of the recent history articulated by still the same powers here when they attempted to justify their invasion of Iraq. The US and UK again made their own coalition and invaded Iraq under the false pretext of searching for WMDs.
"Mr. President,
"The Islamic Republic of Iran is determined to exercise its inalienable right to nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and to build on its own scientific advances in developing various peaceful aspects of this technology. At the same time, Iran as a victim of the use of weapons of mass destruction in recent history has rejected and opposed the development and use of all these inhuman weapons on religious as well as security grounds. The Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran has on several occasions, including in his message to Tehran International Conference on Nuclear Disarmament and Non-proliferation held on April 2010 in Tehran declared that nuclear weapons are forbidden and I brought that message to the attention of this body in my letter circulated as document S/2010/203. I quote from this message: “We consider the use of such weapons as haraam (religiously forbidden) and believe that it is everyone's duty to make efforts to secure humanity against this great disaster.”
"Furthermore the presence and the statement of the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the NPT Review Conference also underlined Iran’s fundamental rejection of nuclear weapons as well as the need to strengthen and revitalize the Non-Proliferation Treaty. This is yet another indication of our great commitment to the issue of NPT and our concern of the dangers of nuclear weapons and the urgent need for its total eradication from the face of the earth.
"Iran indeed kept a close collaboration with the IAEA, and this cooperation at the same juncture it went even beyond its legal obligations I have already elaborated, on many other occasions, numerous examples of such a robust cooperation that Iran has had with the Agency and here I suffice myself to say that since February 2003, the Agency had conducted over 4500 person -day inspection in Iran which represents unprecedented verification activities in a State party since the creation of the Agency.
"However, despite this unprecedented robust and proactive cooperation with the IAEA, few western countries continue their unfair and provocative behavior and hostile attitudes against my country by getting the Security Council unnecessarily involved in this issue and pursuing such politically motivated resolution.
"A striking example of the lack of sincerity of those countries who make false accusations against Iran’s nuclear issue, has manifested itself in the deal on the supply of fuel for Tehran Research Reactor (TRR) which in fact was put on the table, after our request for the Agency’s assistance in purchasing 20% enriched fuel for Tehran Research Reactor, particularly for this reactor which produces radioisotopes for medical purposes for more than 800 thousands cancer-affected patients. While we have proved to be able to enrich uranium to higher levels for production of the fuel needed for Tehran reactor, we preferred as a gesture of good will to exchange our low enriched fuel of 3.5% with the 20% level enriched fuel needed for this reactor. However a few countries, in a miscalculated and politically-motivated action, tabled a resolution at the IAEA Board of Governors in November 2009. In addition to that, provocative remarks by some American and European officials, which created serious suspicions among Iranian people and officials regarding the American and European officials’ real intentions of uranium exchange proposal, damaged the atmosphere and deepened the sense of mistrust.
"Despite this, we still responded positively to the efforts of the two members of the Council, namely Turkey and Brazil who sincerely and at the highest level tried to pursue a deal that was actually what the Vienna Group had wished them to achieve. We displayed our good will and seriousness by agreeing with this initiative that led to the Tehran Declaration on the exchange of fuel. But, instead of welcoming this move, unfortunately, and to the great surprise of the international community that had overwhelmingly supported this Declaration, the same few powers immediately introduced this politically- motivated resolution.
"Those who were unfairly accusing the Islamic Republic of Iran of lack of cooperation are today showing no respect to what they had initially encouraged these two members of the Council to do. This yet again displays the bitter fact that what matters for these few powers is their narrow political interests. It shows that they will break their promises whenever they wish so and that they have no respect neither for other members of the Council nor for the pledges they have themselves made. What is at stake today is the credibility of the Security Council, that has turned into a tool in the toolbox of a few countries who do not hesitate to abuse it when and where their interests require.
"Mr. President,
"One day there should be an end to the unrestrained and rampant applying of double standards that is unfortunately being practiced by this Council. Some powerful members of the Council should provide answers to many legitimate questions that the international public opinion has with regard to their behavior in this Council; they should respond why they have rendered this body incapacitated in reacting to the threats of resort to force against Iran, even the threat of using nuclear weapons, uttered so vividly at the highest levels by the US as reflected in the US Nuclear Posture Review where it exempted Iran from negative security assurances. They should respond to this question that why they have never allowed the Council to take any action with regard to the threats used on a daily basis by the criminal Israeli regime against Iran in violation of the UN Charter. Indeed they should also explain to the international community that why they are pushing the Council to take action against a nation that is only trying to exercise its legal and inalienable rights, while at the same time the same few countries resort to any possible efforts to prevent the Security Council from taking action against Israeli regime's violations of the most basic principles of international law and international humanitarian law as documented by the Goldstone report and have repeatedly prevented this body from moving to stop the massive aggression of the Zionist regime against the Palestinians and Lebanese people. There should be an answer on the part of those who prevented this body to adopt a strong resolution in condemnation of the massacre on board of Freedom Flotilla ship and forced the Council to limit its action to a mere Presidential Statement on this grave brutal and criminal act that is clear example of State terrorism. There should also be an answer why this Council has not given the slightest chance of addressing the Israeli regime’s nuclear arsenal despite its compulsive propensity to engage in aggressions and carnage.
"Mr. President,
"I wish to conclude by stressing that no amount of pressure and mischief will be able to break our nation’s determination to pursue and defend its legal and inalienable rights. Iran as one of the most powerful and stable countries in the region has never bowed and will never bow to the hostile actions and pressures by these few powers and will continue to defend its rights."
United Nations, New York, June 10, IRNA -- Iran's ambassador to the UN said here on Wednesday that no amount of pressure and mischief will be able to break our nation’s determination to pursue and defend its legal and inalienable rights.
Mohammad Khazaee, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations made the remarks before the United Nations Security Council on June 9, 2010.
He added that the Islamic Republic of Iran as one of the most powerful and stable countries in the region has never bowed and will never bow to the hostile actions and pressures by these few powers and will continue to defend its rights."
The full text of his speech is as follows:
"In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
"Mr. President,
"Before entering into this Chamber, I was refreshing my memories about history. History is indeed a wonderful instructor especially when it follows us to this very moment. A Wiseman used to say “It is not the history that repeats itself; it is us that repeat the same mistakes”. Reviewing our bitter past memories together with a close look at how this Council still acts today proves that we are still dealing with a biased and unjust international system that is based on hegemony of the most powerful.
"In order to place on record for the conscience of all peace loving people around the world, I would like to say a few words about the unfair pressures that our nation has endured due to the aggression and intervention of some of the same countries whose representatives are sitting around this table today and pushing for the imposition of more pressures against the Iranian Nation. Let me talk about our own historical experiences. It is not, of course, accidental or spontaneous. Comparison in this case is amazingly instructive. The case that you as members of the Security Council have considered today has quite identical characteristics with the case against my country in 1951. The key words are quite similar: energy, independence and big powers intervention.
"UK in early 50s was arguing exactly the same as today: nationalization of Iran’s oil is putting in danger peace and security of the region and the world. Just replace the phrase “oil nationalization” from accusations against Iran at that time, with “nuclear activities” of today and you will have quite working statements for diplomats who are repeating the history. It is, however, worth remembering that when Iran won the case regarding its oil nationalization in Hague, UK sold a trumped anti-communist story to Eisenhower and a US led coup reinstated Shah's dictatorship. Needless to say, this coup d'état was organized and implemented under the pretext of maintenance of international peace and security, and respect for democracy and freedom, a qualification which, afterwards, was frequently used to justify many other similar subversive actions against other developing nations in order to preserve or expand the interests of international cartels and consortiums. The message was clear: no one should be allowed to endanger the vital interests of the capitalist world.
"Yet again history will not forget about the stark similarity and sharp contrast which exists between the efforts to impose anti-Iranian sanctions at this time and that of the 1950’s against the nationalization of Iranian oil industry. The stark similarity is that the UK-US axis at both times has been at work to deprive Iranian Nation of its absolute right to achieve self-sufficiency in energy production whether it be hydrocarbons or peaceful nuclear energy. The difference, however, is that the Islamic Republic of Iran today is more than ever powerful and supported by its people which enjoys three decades of political experience, a scientific and industrial renaissance and rich cultural heritage and enjoys the support of the overwhelming majority of the nations.
"Mr. President,
"The hostile actions of these few powers against our nation are not new. The US and its allies even intervened on behalf of Saddam in his aggression against Iran, providing him with chemical weapons and other military support. This deadly support included increasing supplies of chemical and biological agents even after the first UN report on the use of these lethal weapons by Saddam against civilian Kurds in northern Iraq and against Iranian troops. The first reaction by these powers was to deny the accounts. The second reaction was to declare any response to the attacks as "premature". The third response was to sharply escalate the delivery of arms and chemical and biological agents. Again no action was taken by the Security Council against this brutal use of chemical weapons because of the veto threats by the same providers of these inhumane weapons. They were the same powers who have imposed this resolution on the Security Council today.
"As soon as the US saw the victory of Iran in the war imminent, it directly entered into confrontation with Iran by among other things, shutting down an Iranian passenger airplane. The inaction by the Security Council was again outrageous.
"I will not dwell on the abuse of this body and the biggest lies of the recent history articulated by still the same powers here when they attempted to justify their invasion of Iraq. The US and UK again made their own coalition and invaded Iraq under the false pretext of searching for WMDs.
"Mr. President,
"The Islamic Republic of Iran is determined to exercise its inalienable right to nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and to build on its own scientific advances in developing various peaceful aspects of this technology. At the same time, Iran as a victim of the use of weapons of mass destruction in recent history has rejected and opposed the development and use of all these inhuman weapons on religious as well as security grounds. The Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran has on several occasions, including in his message to Tehran International Conference on Nuclear Disarmament and Non-proliferation held on April 2010 in Tehran declared that nuclear weapons are forbidden and I brought that message to the attention of this body in my letter circulated as document S/2010/203. I quote from this message: “We consider the use of such weapons as haraam (religiously forbidden) and believe that it is everyone's duty to make efforts to secure humanity against this great disaster.”
"Furthermore the presence and the statement of the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the NPT Review Conference also underlined Iran’s fundamental rejection of nuclear weapons as well as the need to strengthen and revitalize the Non-Proliferation Treaty. This is yet another indication of our great commitment to the issue of NPT and our concern of the dangers of nuclear weapons and the urgent need for its total eradication from the face of the earth.
"Iran indeed kept a close collaboration with the IAEA, and this cooperation at the same juncture it went even beyond its legal obligations I have already elaborated, on many other occasions, numerous examples of such a robust cooperation that Iran has had with the Agency and here I suffice myself to say that since February 2003, the Agency had conducted over 4500 person -day inspection in Iran which represents unprecedented verification activities in a State party since the creation of the Agency.
"However, despite this unprecedented robust and proactive cooperation with the IAEA, few western countries continue their unfair and provocative behavior and hostile attitudes against my country by getting the Security Council unnecessarily involved in this issue and pursuing such politically motivated resolution.
"A striking example of the lack of sincerity of those countries who make false accusations against Iran’s nuclear issue, has manifested itself in the deal on the supply of fuel for Tehran Research Reactor (TRR) which in fact was put on the table, after our request for the Agency’s assistance in purchasing 20% enriched fuel for Tehran Research Reactor, particularly for this reactor which produces radioisotopes for medical purposes for more than 800 thousands cancer-affected patients. While we have proved to be able to enrich uranium to higher levels for production of the fuel needed for Tehran reactor, we preferred as a gesture of good will to exchange our low enriched fuel of 3.5% with the 20% level enriched fuel needed for this reactor. However a few countries, in a miscalculated and politically-motivated action, tabled a resolution at the IAEA Board of Governors in November 2009. In addition to that, provocative remarks by some American and European officials, which created serious suspicions among Iranian people and officials regarding the American and European officials’ real intentions of uranium exchange proposal, damaged the atmosphere and deepened the sense of mistrust.
"Despite this, we still responded positively to the efforts of the two members of the Council, namely Turkey and Brazil who sincerely and at the highest level tried to pursue a deal that was actually what the Vienna Group had wished them to achieve. We displayed our good will and seriousness by agreeing with this initiative that led to the Tehran Declaration on the exchange of fuel. But, instead of welcoming this move, unfortunately, and to the great surprise of the international community that had overwhelmingly supported this Declaration, the same few powers immediately introduced this politically- motivated resolution.
"Those who were unfairly accusing the Islamic Republic of Iran of lack of cooperation are today showing no respect to what they had initially encouraged these two members of the Council to do. This yet again displays the bitter fact that what matters for these few powers is their narrow political interests. It shows that they will break their promises whenever they wish so and that they have no respect neither for other members of the Council nor for the pledges they have themselves made. What is at stake today is the credibility of the Security Council, that has turned into a tool in the toolbox of a few countries who do not hesitate to abuse it when and where their interests require.
"Mr. President,
"One day there should be an end to the unrestrained and rampant applying of double standards that is unfortunately being practiced by this Council. Some powerful members of the Council should provide answers to many legitimate questions that the international public opinion has with regard to their behavior in this Council; they should respond why they have rendered this body incapacitated in reacting to the threats of resort to force against Iran, even the threat of using nuclear weapons, uttered so vividly at the highest levels by the US as reflected in the US Nuclear Posture Review where it exempted Iran from negative security assurances. They should respond to this question that why they have never allowed the Council to take any action with regard to the threats used on a daily basis by the criminal Israeli regime against Iran in violation of the UN Charter. Indeed they should also explain to the international community that why they are pushing the Council to take action against a nation that is only trying to exercise its legal and inalienable rights, while at the same time the same few countries resort to any possible efforts to prevent the Security Council from taking action against Israeli regime's violations of the most basic principles of international law and international humanitarian law as documented by the Goldstone report and have repeatedly prevented this body from moving to stop the massive aggression of the Zionist regime against the Palestinians and Lebanese people. There should be an answer on the part of those who prevented this body to adopt a strong resolution in condemnation of the massacre on board of Freedom Flotilla ship and forced the Council to limit its action to a mere Presidential Statement on this grave brutal and criminal act that is clear example of State terrorism. There should also be an answer why this Council has not given the slightest chance of addressing the Israeli regime’s nuclear arsenal despite its compulsive propensity to engage in aggressions and carnage.
"Mr. President,
"I wish to conclude by stressing that no amount of pressure and mischief will be able to break our nation’s determination to pursue and defend its legal and inalienable rights. Iran as one of the most powerful and stable countries in the region has never bowed and will never bow to the hostile actions and pressures by these few powers and will continue to defend its rights."
